The Paul Stine police report contains a few anomalies that appear to contradict the view that Officer Donald Fouke somehow withheld his sighting of the unknown white male, observed walking along Jackson Street minutes after the murder of Paul Stine on October 11th 1969. This is depicted in the 2007 Zodiac movie, with Dave Toschi expressing consternation at the revelation that the two officers (Eric Zelms and Donald Fouke) had spotted the unknown white male, yet had subsequently failed to stop and question him. The sighting by Donald Fouke failed to make it into any newspaper reports in October, however when the Zodiac Killer mailed the 'Bus Bomb Letter' on November 9th 1969, stating "2 cops pulled a goof", three days later a typed Donald Fouke memorandum was issued on November 12th 1969 ratifying the sighting.
Donald Fouke's description of the likely Zodiac Killer was ""WMA, 35-45 yrs, about 5'10", 180-200 lbs, medium heavy build, barrel chested, medium complexion, light colored hair possibly graying in rear, crew cut, wearing glasses. Dressed in dark blue waist length zipper type jacket (Navy or royal blue). Elastic cuffs and waist band zipped part way up. Brown wool pants pleated type baggy in rear (Rust brown). "
Donald Fouke's description of the likely Zodiac Killer was ""WMA, 35-45 yrs, about 5'10", 180-200 lbs, medium heavy build, barrel chested, medium complexion, light colored hair possibly graying in rear, crew cut, wearing glasses. Dressed in dark blue waist length zipper type jacket (Navy or royal blue). Elastic cuffs and waist band zipped part way up. Brown wool pants pleated type baggy in rear (Rust brown). "
Officer Donald Fouke Now here is the description given by the teenagers who observed the Zodiac Killer in and around the taxicab on Washington Street from a residence across the street. This link is from Zodiackiller.com and details their observations.
http://www.zodiackiller.com/Stine.html
"A white male, 25-30 years old, 5'8" to 5'9", stocky build, reddish-brown hair worn in a crew cut, heavy rimmed glasses and dark clothing."
The second page of the police report, was countersigned by Armond Pelissetti and Frank Peda, the first respondents at the crime scene, and was date stamped 6.29 am October 12th 1969. Indicating this typed report was completed only 8 and one half hours after the murder.
It states this on the second page '#2 SUSPECT: WMA, in his early forties, 5'8", heavy build, reddish-blond, crew cut hair. wearing eyeglasses, dark brown trousers, dark (navy blue or black) "Parka" jacket, dark shoes. Suspect should have many blood stains on his person and clothing, suspect may also be in possession of the keys to the Yellow Cab, possibly has wallet belonging to the victim. Last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street'.
So who furnished this description in the police report. Since the last line stated 'Last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street' and no future sightings of the suspect were mentioned in the report, one would have to assume the description came from the teenagers. However the description in the police report appears a mesh of both Donald Fouke's description and the three teenagers. The teenagers stated 'reddish-brown' hair, yet Donald Fouke in the memorandum stated 'light colored' hair, to become 'reddish-blond' in the police report. The teenagers recalled dark clothing, Donald Fouke recalled 'Brown wool pants' and a 'zipper jacket' (navy or royal blue). This was meshed in the police report as 'dark brown trousers' and the jacket as a "Parka," navy blue or black. Finally the three teenagers described the suspect as 25-30 years, wildly different to the police report of a man in his 'early forties,' but much more in line with Donald Fouke's memorandum of 35-45 years. So who provided the information for #2 SUSPECT. If the police report is describing part of Donald Fouke's description that night, why is he not countersigned on the foot of the report, along with Armond Pelissetti and Frank Peda, despite the fact his observations were apparently crucial to the investigation. We know Armond Pelissetti crossed paths with Donald Fouke that night and it is highly likely Donald Fouke shared his observations with Armond Pelissetti, but this should not detract from the fact that Donald Fouke should be pivotal to the Paul Stine police report. However it is clear his description and observations found a way of surfacing into the police report, either by his own hand or via Armond Pelissetti.
http://www.zodiackiller.com/Stine.html
"A white male, 25-30 years old, 5'8" to 5'9", stocky build, reddish-brown hair worn in a crew cut, heavy rimmed glasses and dark clothing."
The second page of the police report, was countersigned by Armond Pelissetti and Frank Peda, the first respondents at the crime scene, and was date stamped 6.29 am October 12th 1969. Indicating this typed report was completed only 8 and one half hours after the murder.
It states this on the second page '#2 SUSPECT: WMA, in his early forties, 5'8", heavy build, reddish-blond, crew cut hair. wearing eyeglasses, dark brown trousers, dark (navy blue or black) "Parka" jacket, dark shoes. Suspect should have many blood stains on his person and clothing, suspect may also be in possession of the keys to the Yellow Cab, possibly has wallet belonging to the victim. Last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street'.
So who furnished this description in the police report. Since the last line stated 'Last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street' and no future sightings of the suspect were mentioned in the report, one would have to assume the description came from the teenagers. However the description in the police report appears a mesh of both Donald Fouke's description and the three teenagers. The teenagers stated 'reddish-brown' hair, yet Donald Fouke in the memorandum stated 'light colored' hair, to become 'reddish-blond' in the police report. The teenagers recalled dark clothing, Donald Fouke recalled 'Brown wool pants' and a 'zipper jacket' (navy or royal blue). This was meshed in the police report as 'dark brown trousers' and the jacket as a "Parka," navy blue or black. Finally the three teenagers described the suspect as 25-30 years, wildly different to the police report of a man in his 'early forties,' but much more in line with Donald Fouke's memorandum of 35-45 years. So who provided the information for #2 SUSPECT. If the police report is describing part of Donald Fouke's description that night, why is he not countersigned on the foot of the report, along with Armond Pelissetti and Frank Peda, despite the fact his observations were apparently crucial to the investigation. We know Armond Pelissetti crossed paths with Donald Fouke that night and it is highly likely Donald Fouke shared his observations with Armond Pelissetti, but this should not detract from the fact that Donald Fouke should be pivotal to the Paul Stine police report. However it is clear his description and observations found a way of surfacing into the police report, either by his own hand or via Armond Pelissetti.
This tends to dispel the notion Donald Fouke kept the sighting of the white male suspect to himself and from his superiors, and that the memorandum was some form of penance or revelation. It is fairly evident that his commanding officers knew about his encounter with a lone male on Jackson Street by the following day of October 12th 1969. This furthermore casts doubt on the police report claim of a suspect "Last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street."
The teenagers sketch of the Zodiac Killer was amended, the second version showing a distinctly more furrowed, older portrayal of the first, believed to have been revised by the teenagers, but it is equally conceivable it was updated with input from Donald Fouke's sighting.
Thirty eight years later Donald Fouke stated in the documentary 'This is the Zodiac Speaking' "When the composite drawing came out at Richmond Station and was posted on the wall, he looked similar to the man I had seen on October 11th. I then wrote a scratch or inner departmental memorandum to my lieutenant to forward to homicide division, so they would have the additional information about the appearance of the subject." He went on to say "I never spoke to Toschi that I personally know of or remember. He may have been the inspector who came out and asked me about the composite drawing and I told him the suspect was older and heavier, beyond that I had no further contact with the investigation." However there is nothing in this statement that contradicts that he most likely informed his superiors of the suspect description the night of the crime.
Since the suspect in the police report was supposedly last seen heading up Cherry Street, then presumably no input had been typed from the Donald Fouke encounter, as this was distinctly a later sighting. Then we have to explain the discrepancy of the teenagers description of 25-30 years, radically changing to a man in his 'early forties' on page 2 of the police report. This inherently could not be accredited to the three teenagers, unless we conceive the notion that the teenagers had a significant change of opinion, and reconstructed the original composite sketch to an older version with no external influence.
The teenagers sketch of the Zodiac Killer was amended, the second version showing a distinctly more furrowed, older portrayal of the first, believed to have been revised by the teenagers, but it is equally conceivable it was updated with input from Donald Fouke's sighting.
Thirty eight years later Donald Fouke stated in the documentary 'This is the Zodiac Speaking' "When the composite drawing came out at Richmond Station and was posted on the wall, he looked similar to the man I had seen on October 11th. I then wrote a scratch or inner departmental memorandum to my lieutenant to forward to homicide division, so they would have the additional information about the appearance of the subject." He went on to say "I never spoke to Toschi that I personally know of or remember. He may have been the inspector who came out and asked me about the composite drawing and I told him the suspect was older and heavier, beyond that I had no further contact with the investigation." However there is nothing in this statement that contradicts that he most likely informed his superiors of the suspect description the night of the crime.
Since the suspect in the police report was supposedly last seen heading up Cherry Street, then presumably no input had been typed from the Donald Fouke encounter, as this was distinctly a later sighting. Then we have to explain the discrepancy of the teenagers description of 25-30 years, radically changing to a man in his 'early forties' on page 2 of the police report. This inherently could not be accredited to the three teenagers, unless we conceive the notion that the teenagers had a significant change of opinion, and reconstructed the original composite sketch to an older version with no external influence.
The San Francisco Chronicle ran an article on October 21st 1969 entitled 'Lawmen Pool Their Zodiac Clues', continuing the theme that only three eyewitnesses had viewed the killer stating "Meanwhile police circulated a new composite drawing of the "Zodiac" suspect based on further questioning of the three witnesses to Stine's killing. He looks older with a heavier jaw. He is described as being 35-40 years." So if this reporting is factually correct, the description is at least starting to sound more like Donald Fouke's description. But why would Donald Fouke's observations be contained, other than damage limitation, and the embarrassment of letting a suspect slip through their fingers. Despite this, superiors still felt compelled to incorporate his input into the composite sketch to aid in the capture of the killer, which was still foremost in their minds. On the flip side the police department may have no ulterior motive in containing this encounter, wanting the public and newspapers to concentrate their efforts to apprehending the Zodiac Killer, as opposed to focusing their attention back onto the police department itself.
The Fouke memorandum was deemed a response to Zodiac's revelation of an encounter on Jackson Street, but equally they could have stayed quiet on the matter, simply dismissing Zodiac's claims and nobody would be any the wiser, after all Zodiac was deemed a liar and a psychopath by many.
The Fouke memorandum was deemed a response to Zodiac's revelation of an encounter on Jackson Street, but equally they could have stayed quiet on the matter, simply dismissing Zodiac's claims and nobody would be any the wiser, after all Zodiac was deemed a liar and a psychopath by many.